Meta

Category: FDA

The FDA does not regulate the ingredients in skin care products, so it is up to you to take responsibility for your health.

Vicki Saputo, RN has researched safe cosmetics and skin care products for more than 20 years. Her personal list below consists of products she has researched, tested and recommends.

Remember our skin is our body’s largest organ and more than 60% of what we put on our skin is absorbed into our blood stream. We don’t want to absorb hormone disruptors, carcinogens or neurotoxins. Organic, natural products are recommended with the absence of synthetic preservatives, artificial colors (esp. FDC’s), chemical fragrances and chemical additives and nanoparticles. Vicki has done most of the research for you, so go for it and enjoy.

The FDA does not regulate the ingredients in skin care products, so it is up to you to take responsibility for your health. Vicki saves you lots of time in chosing safe healthy products that nourish your skin.

The drug epidemic plaguing the United States seems to only get worse as time trudges on. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced recently that drug overdose is now the leading cause of death for American adults under the age of 50.

At the helm of this devastating surge in drug-related deaths are, of course, opioids. Opioids are a class of drugs that includes heroin, fentanyl and many legal prescription painkillers such as oxycodone and hydrocodone. According to the CDC, oxycodone, hydrocodone and methadone are the most common prescription drugs used in overdose deaths. The agency reports that at least 1 out of every 4 people prescribed an opioid is estimated to struggle with addiction, and that emergency rooms are treating over 1,000 people who have misused an opioid every day.

During his announcement, Rosenstein stated that fentanyl — a synthetic opioid — is becoming increasingly problematic, in large part due to its extreme potency. “Fentanyl is especially dangerous. It is 40 to 50 times more deadly than heroin. Just two milligrams, a few grains of salt, an amount you could fit on the tip of your finger, can be lethal. Fentanyl exposure can injure or kill innocent law enforcement officers and first responders. Inhaling a few airborne particles can have dramatic effects,” he explained.

NPR reports that approximately 75 percent of people who died from an accidental overdose in 2016 had fentanyl in their systems. One of the biggest threats posed by fentanyl is that other drugs are often cut with it, meaning that users may not be aware of the potential danger.

While loath to admit it, one of the driving factors behind this heartbreaking epidemic is indeed prescription opioid use. Not only are the prescription drugs themselves contributing to the massive death toll, they are indirectly increasing the number of people who use street drugs like heroin. The National Institute on Drug Abuse reports that an estimated 80 percent of heroin users started out using prescription pain-killers.

In other words, opioid pain-killers are not just responsible for the deaths of people who overdose on a prescription drug, they are also responsible for the deaths of an overwhelming majority of heroin users.

As Amy Goodman from Democracy Now! reports, it’s been estimated that a staggering 52,000 people died from a drug overdose in 2015 — and over half of those deaths were related to opioid pain medications, heroin or fentanyl. Goodman explains further, “To put the death toll in perspective, opioid deaths have surpassed the peak in death by car crash in 1972, AIDS deaths in 1995 and gun deaths in 1993. After 20 years of heavy combat in South Vietnam, U.S. military casualties represented only one-third of the death toll from 10 years of opioid overdoses.”

ASAM.org breaks it down even further, noting that while 12,990 of overdose deaths were related to heroin, a shocking 20,101 overdose deaths were related to prescription opioids.

To put it simply, prescription opioids are, without a doubt, a driving force behind the rising rates of drug addiction and overdose in the US. Several US states, as well as cities and counties, have brought the Big Pharma corporations responsible for these drugs to court for their involvement in creating this outbreak of addiction. For example, the state of Ohio recently launched a lawsuit against several pharmaceutical companies for purporting that the drugs had benefits unsupported by science, promoting fraudulent information and misleading patients.

Opioids are extremely dangerous drugs; even Pfizer has admitted that they carry a substantial risk for addiction when used “properly.”

While it’s clear that the opioid epidemic will sadly not be ending anytime soon, hopefully more states will continue to take action against Big Pharma. Keep up with the latest stories about drugs and drug-makers at DangerousMedicine.com.

The search for eternal life isn’t new, but how far we’ve come from the Holy Grail, the Fountain of Youth and the hidden valley of Shangri-La, is truly a sign of the times. Today, the crossroads meet between the natural tendency to find an easy way out, and the seductive promise of profits. The quest is on for how to put longevity in a pill.

Classifying age as a disease means insurance companies will cover treatment. The FDA just paved the way.

Two years ago, investigators convinced the FDA to green-light a human lifespan study of Metformin, a drug currently used as first-line treatment for blood sugar control in type 2 diabetes, and off-label for polycystic ovary syndrome, weight control, and cancer prevention. If successful, Metformin will be the first drug to be FDA-approved for the indication of aging, but it won’t be the last. With a potential audience of 7½ billion people worldwide, pharmaceutical companies will race to fund clinical trials for the discovery of new, more expensive drugs.

High levels of blood sugar and insulin are important factors in degenerative disorders, cardiovascular disease, cancer, and aging. Metformin lowers blood sugar in two ways, by using it efficiently and preventing its production in the liver. This, in turn, lowers insulin levels and insulin resistance. The drug intrigues researchers because its protective effect on aging goes beyond the power to control sugar and insulin.

Everything Metformin can and might do for healthy aging can be achieved with lifestyle choices.

The TAME Study (Targeting Aging With Metformin) began in 2016, aiming to enroll 3,000 seniors, ages 70 – 80, and study them for 5 – 7 years at 15 centers across the U.S. Study subjects can have or be at risk for any or all of 3 common aging conditions: cancer, heart disease, and dementia. The study excludes type 2 diabetics because the effect of Metformin has already been shown in that group. The question is whether Metformin can delay or prevent cancer, heart disease, cognitive impairment, diabetes and death in non-diabetics. If it does, the obvious next step is to test it for use in much younger people.

Clues about Metformin’s role in anti-aging come from studies of fruit flies, roundworms, and mice. Most of the credit goes to an enzyme few people have heard of, AMPK (adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase). AMPK regulates how cells process energy, which, when working well, helps prevent all of the chronic diseases associated with aging, and aging itself. The goal is to activate AMPK to gain its benefits and live a healthier, longer life.

AMPK Benefits For Healthspan And Lifespan:

Increases metabolism

Burns fat and sugar / Weight loss

Improves body composition

Increases blood flow

Antioxidant

Anti-inflammatory

Cell detoxification and renewal

Is Metformin the anti-aging miracle drug researchers hope for, or will it go the way of some other FDA “miracles” before it? Fen-Phen Vioxx, Meridia, Baycol, and DES, are just a few that come to mind.

There is good reason for skepticism:

Aging is a chronic, inflammatory process that leads to a loss of structure and function, impairing both healthspan and lifespan. Aging is best addressed with health and longevity promoting strategies, not disease prevention.

Aging is multifactorial. Elements that benefit or harm longevity work together in synergy. The magic bullet approach, focusing on one aspect of disease, works for simple problems like treating a strep throat with penicillin, but disappoints for complex chronic disorders and aging. It has failed over and over, but investigators refuse to let it go.

Every drug has side effects and risks that must be weighed against its benefits. Metformin carries a black box warning for the rare, but real, risk of developing lactic acidosis, a potentially fatal build-up of lactate in the blood, especially for anyone with reduced kidney function. More common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache and drowsiness. Let’s don’t forget the “inactive ingredients” that act as toxic counterweights to any drug benefits:

Metformin may promote Alzheimer’s Disease. Type 2 diabetes is a risk factor for Alzheimer’s, so researchers assume drugs that treat diabetes will prevent dementia. Unfortunately, studies link long-term Metformin use to a greater risk of developing AD and worsening its progression. One study proposed this occurs because the drug increases production of beta-amyloid, a protein universally recognized as a hallmark of Alzheimer’s.

Aspirin, a more widely used drug than Metformin, also activates AMPK and may be a safer choice if going the drug route. Metformin is pro-inflammatory.

Generally, when something sounds too good to be true, it is. Activating AMPK promotes longevity, but isolating one strategy from the context in which it normally occurs, is like a game of Jenga: disrupt the delicate balance and the whole thing falls apart.

There is a better way.

Natural anti-aging approaches exist and have been scientifically validated. They take commitment and they’re not easy but they avoid the inevitable downside of chronic drug use. They activate AMPK and all of its interrelated systems.

Calorie restriction is the most successful method of slowing and reversing markers of aging. The idea is to lower calorie intake a moderate amount to induce a healthy level of stress that strengthens cells and organ, but not so much as to cause malnutrition. The ongoing CALERIE study is monitoring healthy individuals committed to a 25% reduction in caloric intake. So far, results are promising.

Intermittent fasting (also known as “time-restricted feeding”) is an alternative to calorie restriction. Confining eating to an 8 to 12-hour daily window reduces inflammation and free radical damage, and has been shown to fight dementia, cancer and promote longevity.

Exercise uses up energy, which activates AMPK. High intensity, short interval exertion is especially effective. Muscle contraction during both aerobics and weight training stimulates AMPK and increases insulin sensitivity.

Cold water immersion after exercise enhances AMPK and cellular renewal. Going from the sauna into the plunge pool, or taking an ice cold shower after a workout are easy ways to practice cold shock. It’s great training for the annual Polar Bear Challenge.

Get good sleep. Impaired quality and/or quantity of sleep is incompatible with long-term health. For example, obstructive sleep apnea is related to a 20% reduction in life expectancy, weight gain, heart disease, diabetes, earlier than average age of onset of memory disorders and cognitive impairment. Melatonin, the sleep hormone, activates AMPK and cellular rejuvenation, protecting against cardiovascular and other sleep deprivation related disorders.

Acupuncture is effective in treating obesity and improving cognitive function. It upregulates AMPK in the hippocampus, the brain center for short term memory and ground zero for the development of Alzheimer’s Disease.

These and other natural anti-aging strategies are consistently practiced in Blue Zones, unrelated regions around the globe where the most long-lived people are found. Drugs and “longevity genes” are not the reason this Guinness World Record-worthy group boasts a large number of centenarians. Their way of life is the secret sauce for extending healthspan and lifespan.

Whatever your age, it’s never too late for a healthy system reboot. Start now, by adopting a lifestyle game plan that promotes healthy longevity.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is tasked with making sure that drugs and medical devices are safe and efficient for Americans to use. However, it appears that the agency doesn’t take its job seriously enough, because a new study shows that nearly 1/3 of medications approved from 2001 to 2010 had safety issues years after they were made widely available to patients, and some were quite serious. [1]

The study, published May 9 in JAMA, shows that 71 of the 222 drugs approved during that time period were withdrawn, required a “black box” due to their side effects, or warranted a safety announcement about new risks.

Source: Center for American Progress

Dr. Joseph Ross, an associate professor of medicine at Yale School of Medicine, says:

“While the [Trump] administration pushes for less regulation and faster approvals, those decisions have consequences.”

A 2015 independent analysis of drugs approved using the agency’s expedited approval process found that the trend of speeding approval “is being driven by drugs that are not first in class and thus potentially are less innovative.” [2]

But President Trump isn’t the first president to pressure the FDA to speed up its drug approvals.

On December 13, 2016, President Barack Obama signed the 21st Century Cures Act. The law provides speedier routes to approval by pushing the FDA to consider evidence beyond the normal 3 phases of clinical trials. The move upset many researchers who feared the law would allow the approval of drugs that haven’t been adequately studied.

Says Dr. Vinay Prasad, a hematologist-oncologist and professor at Oregon Health and Sciences University, who wasn’t involved in the study:

“I’m actually sympathetic to the idea that there are ways in which the FDA can be more streamlined and do a quicker job. The one place you don’t want to cut a corner is safety and efficacy prior to coming to market.”

According to the study, during the first decade of the millennium, the FDA approved drugs faster than the U.K.’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the majority of clinical trials in drug approvals involved fewer than 1,000 participants, and lasted 6 months or less, according to the findings. [1]

On average, it took 4 years and 2 months after the drugs were approved for safety issues to emerge. The most troublesome drugs included psychiatric medications, biologic drugs, drugs granted “accelerated approval,” and drugs that gained approval at the tail end of the regulatory period.

But drugs that were granted accelerated approval had the worst track record. Dr. Nicholas S. Downing, an author of the study and a resident physician of internal medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, says:

“The key message with all new drugs and technology is that there is an ongoing learning process that will continue through the lifetime of the drug.

Downing says that scientists need to continuously test drugs to make sure they work with a wide range of variables, and used aspirin as an example. The medication has been used for hundreds of years, yet “there are still countless new studies coming out, and we learn more about it all the time.” [2]

Nearly one out of every three drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have a new safety issue detected in the years after approval, says a Yale-led study. While most of the safety concerns are not serious enough to require withdrawal of a drug from the market, the finding highlights the need for ongoing surveillance of new drugs in the post-market period, said the researchers.

To assess new drugs for safety and effectiveness, the FDA relies on premarket drug testing and clinical trials. Most of the trials involve fewer than 1,000 patients studied over a period of six months or less, making it difficult to detect safety issues that might be identified once more patients use the drug over a longer time period. To identify factors that might enhance patient safety and regulatory surveillance efforts, the Yale-led team analyzed data on new drugs approved between 2001 and 2010, with follow up through 2017.

The research team, led by associate professor of medicine and public health Dr. Joseph Ross, found that 32% of new drugs were flagged for a safety issue after approval. “That is very rarely a drug withdrawal, but more commonly a black box warning, or drug safety communication issued by the FDA to let physicians and patients know that new safety information has been determined,” said Ross.

The researchers also identified characteristics of drugs that were more likely to be associated with a safety concern, including biologic therapies and drugs that were approved through the FDA’s accelerated approval pathway.

While the study results point to the need for ongoing monitoring of newly approved drugs, they also demonstrate that the FDA’s current process is working. “The fact that the FDA is issuing safety communications means it is doing a good job of following newly approved drugs and evaluating their safety up in the post-market period,” Ross noted.

At a time when the FDA is under pressure to accelerate drug approvals, the study findings provide key information about the agency’s process. “It shows that there is the potential for compromising patient safety when drug evaluation is persistently sped up,” said Ross. At the very least, the study should inform ongoing debate about premarket drug evaluation, the researchers said.

Other authors on the study are Nicholas Downing, Nilay Shah, Jenerius Aminawung, Alison Pease, Jean-David Zeitoun, and Harlan Krumholz. All authors have completed the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest, which are detailed in the study.

Yet another shocking blow has been delivered to people who still ardently claim that vaccines are “safe and effective,” and that the only complications they can cause are “mild.” The US government department for Health Resources and Services Administration has recently released the running tally of the just-past-half-way-complete US Fiscal Year (FY) of 2017 for compensable vaccine injuries. It currently stands at over $142 million dollars. You read that right. That covers the 377 cases that were thus far successful in obtaining compensation in fiscal year 2017 through the heavily biased (to put it politely) system allegedly in place to redress damage done by vaccines in the USA.

At the rate things are going, we might expect the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program to pay out around $220 million or more by the close of FY 2017. To clarify, US Fiscal Year 2017 runs from October 1st, 2016 to September 30th, 2017 – there’s still over four months remaining to rack up more carnage.

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 was created to “reduce liability and respond to public health concerns.” It granted immunity to pharmaceutical companies and prevented parents from suing vaccine makers for vaccine injuries or death. What other industry has such exceptional standards applied to it? Why the special privilege a.k.a. license to injure and kill with impunity?

According to the CDC’s website, there are “limitations in our knowledge of the risks associated with vaccines” and vaccinations have “the following problems”:

Poorly constructed research studies (not enough people enrolled for the period of time)

Inadequate systems to track vaccine side effects

Few experimental studies were published in the medical literature.”1 (emphasis added)

The above very revealing admissions from the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) completely undercut the pathological overconfidence exhibited in the extreme portions of the community pushing for mandatory vaccination.

Similarly, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program compensation numbers are, not only not reassuring, but, frankly astonishing, and should give not just all parents, but all people in general, serious pause. If vaccines are “safe and effective” as our medical practitioners and politicians constantly tell us via mainstream media outlets, then why are there already over 370 compensated cases in fiscal year 2017? Why is there a running payout total from 1988 up to now of “around $3.6 billion,” according to the US Health Resources and Services Administration?

Why, if vaccines are just so gosh darned safe, does the HRSA government website state (see image above) that, “Since influenza vaccines (vaccines administered to large numbers of adults each year) were added to the VICP in 2005, many adult petitions related to that vaccine have been filed, thus changing the proportion of children to adults receiving compensation”?2

It seems to make some sense that the true purpose of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is simply to pay lip service to justice and decency, while allowing pharmaceutical companies to receive a minor slap on the wrist (largely in the form of bad PR) before they go right on with business as usual – “pay to play” or something like that (but then I’m a cynic.). The economic losses are affordable and “worth it”; the human losses are an inconvenient public relations issue to be “managed.”

So Many Questions, So Few Answers

Why, if “many” fully grown adults are seeking injury compensation should we make the blanket assumption that these same vaccines will be “safe and effective” for babies and small children? The doses are not weight adjusted. No vaccines are weight adjusted to account for the much smaller and more fragile physiology of a baby. Why? Why does a baby receive the same amount of heavy metals, carcinogens, and the many other toxic ingredients (such as polysorbate-80) that a full grown 200 pound man receives? Where else in medicine is such a lack of dose control not only tolerated, by blindly promoted and held as sacred?

Why are we not seeing any double-blind randomized controlled trials with true placebo groups demonstrating clearly and honestly that flu (or other) vaccines are safe and not causing children any harm – as well as being “effective”? Until 2005, based on the HRSA document, the ONLY petitions filed for flu vaccine injuries were on behalf of injured children. Where are those safety studies again? Where are the weight adjusted doses again? Why isn’t anyone taking up RFK Jr’s $100,000 mercury challenge if mercury-containing vaccines are so demonstrably safe? Why, why, why, Mr Anderson?

A recent peer-reviewed study published in the Pace Environmental Law Review looked at cases of vaccine injury that have been monetarily compensated by the VICP.

The study investigated approximately 1300 cases of childhood brain injury as a result of vaccines in which the Special Masters ruled for the plaintiffs, looking for references to autism, symptoms of autism or disorders commonly associated with autism. It reports that twenty-one cases actually stated “autism or autism-like symptoms” in the court records. The researchers then identified and contacted 150 more compensated families to find out whether the children had autism. They were able to find an additional 62 cases (greater than 40% of their sample) for a total of 83 cases of autism. In 39 cases (47%) there was confirmation of autism beyond parental report.3 (Emphasis added. Autism is a proven vaccine adverse event. It is also listed in vaccine inserts as one of many possible abreactions.)

Since 1988, when the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program began, 5,353 petitions were assessed as compensable out of the 18,072 filed since then. Nearly 1-in-3 is actually fairly impressive, given the incredible medical, social, and legal bias against recognizing vaccine harm when it occurs, as well as the determined efforts by pharmaceutical companies in court to distort reality and manufacture false doubt in defending their products and controlling perception.

This doesn’t look good at a time when proponents of removing freedom of health choice are campaigning for “no jab no fly” policies that would prevent much of Australia from functioning (particularly economically). This fear-mongering and vaccine hysteria is all the more absurd when one pauses to consider that in Australia, as in the US, the clear majority of adults are FAR from being “up to date” with their shots – and have been for decades. We simply don’t worry about it. And yet, the much-feared epidemics never seem to materialize. In fact, most outbreaks seem to follow in the wake of intensive vaccination campaigns – but that’s just a coincidence, right? Just as it’s a coincidence that within hours of getting your baby home from the doctor’s surgery they were seizing, turning blue, and in the nascent stages of encephalopathy…Right?

Because clearly, after $3.6 billion dollars worth of legal payouts in the US alone since 1988 – and with adverse events being under-reported (in the VAERS) to the extent of 90%or more, and with mature adults and children alike being injured by flu (and the other) vaccines to the extent of requiring compensation, clearly, vaccines are simply “safe and effective.”

Logically, if we mandated vaccination across the board, the only possible outcome is an explosion of vaccine injuries and people seeking compensation. It’s simple math. More vaccines means more vaccine injuries and deaths. Aside from the immeasurable human psychological cost and loss of quality of life, who is going to fund the payouts? Is Big Pharma stepping up to the plate and preparing to own the harm it is causing? Not likely, since pharmaceutical companies are legally immune (at least in America). Vaccine Injury Compensation Program funding comes from an excise tax charged on each vaccine:

Vaccine Injury claims are paid from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, managed by the U.S. Department of Treasury.

The [VICP] Trust Fund receives its money from a 75 cent excise tax on vaccines recommended by the [CDC] for routine administration to children. The excise tax is imposed on each dose, or preventable disease of a given vaccination. (central-pennsylvania.legalexaminer.com)

This reminds me of the carbon tax, which essentially allows “polluters” to simply pay a tax/”penalty” for their emissions and continue with business as usual. It isn’t a deterrent at all for vaccine manufacturers. They would factor it in to their costs of operating.

Disturbing Changes

In September 2014, the CDC notified federal vaccine advisory committees that soon they will no longer be accepting vaccine adverse event reports via phone, fax, or mail. Instead, officials have stated that they will only accept electronic reports of vaccine reactions, injuries, hospitalizations, and death. (vactruth.com)

According to VacTruth, “70 percent of VAERS reports are still filed the old-fashioned way, handwritten and submitted via mail or fax. A mere 30 percent of adverse event reports are submitted to VAERS online.”4 Therefore, the change to adverse event reporting seems designed to make it harder to keep accurate tabs on the true number of significant vaccine injuries by discouraging reporting them in general. Some parents dealing with a severe abreaction in a child may also be too overwhelmed and distressed to have the time or inner resources to file a report, a fact few people even consider. Other factors make obtaining compensation even harder:

…certain adverse reactions from vaccines have been removed from the injury tables, including encephalopathy (swelling of the brain) and seizure disorders resulting from specific vaccines, two very common adverse reactions…and autism as a primary injury. Injuries from anthrax and smallpox vaccines are not covered under the NVICP…Parents who file a report with VAERS must file a separate report if they wish to seek compensation for their child’s vaccine injury or death. Furthermore, if your child was hospitalized from a vaccine, but they did not require surgery, you would not be able to file a claim seeking compensation, unless you can prove with certain kinds of evidence that the effects of the injury have lasted longer than six months.5

You also need an attorney to file on your behalf. And did you know that injury claims may take from two to ten years to resolve through the VICP? Imagine being a bereaved parent and pondering that life-sucking prospect. The system is very clearly weighted against any kind of justice for vaccine-injured people. This is why I say that nearly 1-in-3 cases receiving compensation so far is actually quite an achievement – all things considered.

You may support blanket vaccination on the way IN to the doctor’s surgery, but you may not support it so much when your child is brain-dead (or just dead) 72 hours later. It happens. I personally know many vaccine-injured people – so many I’ve lost count. My partner is one (thank you very much, Gardasil). The media hides it. Politicians lie about it. Doctors parrot fallacious medical dogmas without thinking. Big Pharma continues doing what Big Pharma does best: poisoning us while we pay them for the privilege.

The x-factor is YOU, the wild card, the ghost in the machine, the one who can stop, think, and say “NO.” You have the power to recognise something that doesn’t make sense and to try a different way – and if you have children then, more to the point, you have the responsibility.

Next fiscal year, let’s aim for $0 in compensation payouts through 100% non-compliance – meaning no vaccine injuries and deaths at all – and a public that understands REAL disease risk and how to actually be resistant and robust rationally. Wouldn’t that be something?

It turns out every new medical drug should contain a warning: “The FDA approved this medicine. Watch out.”

Perhaps the warning should be more extreme: “If you’re taking this drug, have an emergency medical crew on stand-by.”

A new study, published in the Journal of American Medical Association, examined all 222 drugs approved by the FDA between 2001 and 2010. The finding? Years after approval, roughly a third of the medicines were then labeled with warnings about serious adverse effects; and some of those warnings indicated life-threatening complications. For example, cancer and liver damage. For example, death—which, the last time I looked, is life-threatening.

The Washington Post reports: “Among the drugs with added warnings [years after the drugs were approved, as safe, for public use]: Humira, used for arthritis and some other illnesses; Abilify, used for depression and other mental illness; and Pradaxa, a blood thinner. The withdrawn drugs [taken off the market] and the reason: Bextra, an anti-inflammatory medicine, heart problems; Raptiva, a psoriasis drug, rare nervous system illness; and Zelnorm, a bowel illness drug, heart problems.”

A pharma trade-group spokeswoman told the Post: “Even with rigorous clinical studies and regulatory review it may be impossible to detect certain safety signals until several years after approval, once the medicine is in broader use.”

No doubt. And that’s why the public is subjected to the luck of the draw, a roll of the dice, a spin of the roulette wheel.

Of course, as I never tire of pointing out, a landmark review (July 26, 2000) in the Journal of American Medical Association, by Dr. Barbara Starfield, found that, every year in the US, FDA approved drugs kill 106,000 people. Extrapolating to a decade, that would be a million deaths.

The new study confirms only a small part of the overall problem.

And the overall problem is what major media don’t want to report on—and what the federal government doesn’t want to touch with a 10-foot pole.

The new study is what intelligence agencies would call a limited hangout, which is a public admission of part of a problem or scandal that is, in fact, much bigger. The huge scandal, in this case, is the routine death-by-medicine numbers every year—which is ignored by the press and the government.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.